2.1.Nested physical systems and the second frequency micro-scale material reality (Field-gas=aether, field material layer)

             

THE CURRENT BLOG (ONLINE BOOK) HAS MAINLY SPECULATIVE CHARACTER AND IS  INTRODUCING ONLY VERY PARTIALLY NEW QUANTITATIVE FORMULAE OF PHYSICAL PHENOMENA. IT IS MAINLY A CHANGE OF PERCEPTION OF THE PHYSICAL REALITY AS WE KNOW IT, TO ONE THAT HAS ALSO A 2ND  MICROSCOPIC LAYER BASED ON THE ANALOGUE OF THE TRIAD OF FREE AND PERMANENT PARTICLES OF PROTON ELECTRON AND NEUTRON BUT ON A SMALLER SCALE AS MICRO-TRIAD OF FREE AND PERMANENT PARTICLES OF MICRO-PROTON MICRO-ELECTRON AND MICRO-NEUTRON (BUT ALSO MACROSCOPIC LAYER) , THAT CURRENTLY WE KNOW PARTIALLY AS FIELDS LIKE GRAVITATIONAL FIELD, ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD OR QUANTUM VACUUM. THE MAIN PROOF OF THE  EXISTENCE OF MICRO-PROTON , MICRO-ELECTRON AND MICRO-NEUTRON  IS THE FAMOUS IN QUANTUM MECHANICS, 2-SLIT ELECTRON EXPERIMENT WHERE IT IS PHOTOGRAPHED NOT ONLY THE ELECTRON THIS HITS THE PHOTOGRAPHIC PLATE BUT ALSO THE WAVE OF CHARGE BY SUCH MICRO-PARTICLES THAT THE ELECTRON MOTION CREATES.  WE LEAVE OPEN THE MANY DIFFERENT WAYS THAT THE MATTER OF PROTONS/NEUTRONS/ELECTRONS CAN COUPLE WITH THE 2ND LAYER MATTER OF MICRO-PROTINS/MICRO-NEUTRONS/MICRO-ELECTRONS IN OTHER WORDS THE GRAVITATIONAL FIELD THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD AND THE "QUANTUM VACUUM".
THE ONLY NEW SPECULATION OF QUANTITATIVE DESCRIPTION IS THE APPLICATION OF THE WELL KNOWN NAVIER-STOKES EQUATIONS FOR THIS 2ND MICROSCOPIC FLUID LAYER IN THE ABSENCE OF COUPLING WITH THE VISIBLE MATTER (OF ELECTRONS PROTONS NEUTRONS OR PLANETS ). THEREFORE A QUANTITATIVE FORMULATION WHICH IS OF APPLICATIONS TO A RATHER  MACROSCOPIC SCALE E.G. SOLAR SYSTEM SCALE. IT IS SPECULATED THOUGH HOW BY CHANGING THE PERCEPTION OF MATERIAL REALITY FROM A SINGLE LAYER (OR FREQUENCY) OF THE STANDARD ABOVE FREE AND PERMANENT TRIAD OF PARTICLES TO AT LEAST A DOUBLE LAYER (OR FREQUENCIES) PHYSICAL REALITY WITH BOTH THE STANDARD TRIAD OF FREE AND PERMANENT PARTICLES BUT ALSO MICRO-TRIAD  OF FREE AND PERMANENT PARTICLES WE COULD DO THE NEXT:
A) REFORMULATE EQUATIONS OF GRAVITATION WHICH INCLUDE THOSE OF I. NEWTON AND ARE MORE EXACT AND PHYSICALLY MEANINGFUL AND REALISTIC THAN THOSE OF A. EINSTEIN. 
B) REFORMULATE AND PROVE AGAIN THE SPECIAL RELATIVITY FORMULAE AS A KIND OF "LINEARIZED WAVED INERTIA" OF E.G. AN ELECTRON ON THE SUBSTRATUM 2ND LAYER PHYSICAL REALITY, BUT UNDER TOTALLY DIFFERENT AXIOMS THAT DO NOT INVOLVE THAT NOTHING GOES FASTER THAN LIGHT.
C) REFORMULATE NON-LINEAR EQUATIONS FOR THE CLASSICAL ELECTROMAGNETISM WHICH INVOLVE THOUGH MAGNITUDES OF GRAVITATION TOO, FOR  LARGE SCALE PHENOMENA E.G. SOLAR SYSTEM SCALE PHENOMENA . THE CLASSICAL ELECTROMAGNETISM IS ONLY THE LINEAR COUPLING OF THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD WHICH IS MADE FROM THE MICRO-TRIAD OF MICRO-PROTONS MICRO-NEUTRONS AND MICRO-ELECTRONS, WITH THE MATTER OF ELECTRONS/PROTONS/NEUTRONS AND IS ACCEPTABLE APPROXIMATELY CORRECT AT SMALL LABORATORY SCALE.  
D) AFTER THE JOIN REFORMULATION OF CLASSICAL GRAVITATION AND CLASSICAL ELECTROMAGNETISM IN THE NEXT DECADES PREDICT  THE EXISTENCE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC DEVICES THAT MAY EXTRACT RENEWABLE SOLAR ENERGY STORED IN THE GRAVITATIONAL FIELD (FREE ENERGY). AND THE EXISTENCE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC PROPULSION FLYING VEHICLES IN VARIOUS SHAPES, INCLUDING DISC-SHAPES, THAT MAY USE THE ABOVE ENERGY FOR FLYING .
E) DERIVE THE SCHRODINGER WAVE MECHANICS OR THE EQUIVALENT HEISENBERG MATRIX MECHANICS FROM A LINEAR COUPLING OF THE  SUBSTRATUM  LAYER NEUTRAL FLUID OF MICRO-TRIAD OF FREE AND PERMANENT PARTICLES (CALLED ERRONEOUSLY QUANTUM VACUUM) OR GRAVITATIONAL FIELD WITH THE MATTER OF ELECTRONS/PROTONS/NEUTRONS. 

IN SUMMARY MORE THAN 80% THE CONTENT OF THE CURRENT WORKS IS TO CHANGE DEEPLY AND IN A PROFOUND WAY OUR QUALITATIVE PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE PHYSICAL REALITY WHICH CAN LEAD IN  THE FUTURE DECADES TO A  UNIFIED QUANTITATIVE APPROACH TO GRAVITATION AND ELECTROMAGNETISM. IN LESS THAN 20% OF THE SPECULATIONS, THE ONLY QUANTITATIVE SET OF FORMULAE (THOSE OF NAVIER-STOKES) THAT ARE INTRODUCED ARE ONLY A PRELIMINARY STEP THAT CAN BE DONE IN RATHER EASIER WAY FOR THIS UNIFICATION, AND HAS APPLICATIONS MAINLY TO LARGER SCALE PHENOMENA E.G.  SOLAR SYSTEM SCALE GRAVITATION AND ELECTROMAGNETISM.

  

  BECAUSE THE TERM AETHER IS KNOWN TO BE DISCREDITED AT LEAST FOR A WHOLE CENTURY, WE NEED TO CLARIFY ITS RELEVANCY TO THE THEORIES OF FIELDS WHICH ARE WELL ACCEPTED.

1) SPECIAL AND GENERAL RELATIVITY ARE NOTHING MORE THAN MODELS OF AETHER FOR INERTIAL MASS, AND FOR THE UNIVERSAL ATTRACTION. ANY MODEL OF AETHER  AS CLASSICAL "FIELD" (GRAVITATIONAL OR ELECTROMAGNETIC ETC) THAT DOES NOT GET DEEPLY TO THE INDIVISIBLE FREE AND PERMANENT PARTICLES MATERIAL STRUCTURE OF THE FIELD ITSELF, IS INADEQUATE FOR A FULL MODEL OF AETHER AS WE SHALL SEE.  THE INDIVISIBLEs OR PARTICLES OF A FIELD ARE OBVIOUSLY NONE OF THE KNOWN PARTICLES, BUT STILL THEY CAN BE AS SIMPLE AS THE KNOWN TRIADS OF PROTON, NEUTRON ELECTRON ONLY AT RADICALLY SMALLER SIZE.

OTHER CLASSICAL MODELS OF AETHER ARE 
2) THE MAXWELL'S ELECTROMAGMETIC FIELD (OR ELECTROMAGNETIZED AETHER AS MAXWELL WAS CALLING IT) 
3) THE QUANTUM VACUUM THAT AS SUBSTRATUM GIVES RANDOMNESS TO MOTIONS OF PROTONS, NEUTRONS, ELECTRONS THROUGH THE SCHRODINGER WAVE EQUATION (DIRAC'S AETHER)

A MODERN SUCCESSFUL UNIFYING THEORY OF "AETHER" AS A GASEOUS FLUID ,OR IN BETTER TERMS 2ND FREQUENCY MATERIAL PHYSICAL REALITY (SEE ALSO POST 6 ) SHOULD BE ABLE TO DERIVE ALL THE ABOVE 20TH CENTURY CONCEPTS OF ""AETHER" IN OTHER WORDS 
FROM THE CONCEPT OF 2ND FREQUENCY MATERIAL REALITY AND IN PARTICULAR FROM THE CONCEPT OF GASEOUS FLUID FROM 3 TYPES OF PERMANENT AND FREE PARTICLES (LIKE MICRO-ELECTRON, MICRO-PROTON, MICRO-NEUTRON) WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DERIVE AS SPECIAL TYPE APPROXIMATIONS UNDER SIMPLIFYING ASSUMPTIONS.

1) THE LABORATORY MID-SCALE LINEAR CLASSICAL MAXWELL EQUATIONS OF THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD (LABRATORY MID-SCALE INTERACTION OF CHARGED MATTER WITH "AETHER" )

2) THE MACROSCOPIC EINSTEINS AND NEWTONS EQUATIONS OF TH GRAVITATIONAL FIELD, AND EINSTEINS EQUATIONS OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY (MACROSCOPIC INTERACTION OF NEUTRAL  MATTER WITH "AETHER")

3) THE MICROSCOPIC SCHROENDINGERS EQUATIONS OF MOTION OF PARTICLES (MICROSCOPIC INTERACTION OF NEUTRAL  MATTER WITH "AETHER" )

THE USE OF THE TERM "AETHER" IN THE CURRENT RESEARCH IS AS A SUMMARY OF THE WELL ESTABLISHED PHYSICAL THEORIES OF 1) ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD 2) SPECIAL RELATIVITY AND GRAVITATIONAL  FIELD 3) QUANTUM "VACUUM" SUBSTRATUM IN THE SCHROENDINGER WAVE EQUATION.

THE INTENDED UNIFICATION AND DERIVATION OF THE ABOVE FIELDS, IS WHEN WE CONCEIVE "AETHER" AS THE PLASMA STATE OF THE 2ND FREQUENCY MATERIAL REALITY (NOT THE PLASMA OF THE 1ST FREQUENCY MATERIAL REALITY). (See also post 6)

  SOME FAMOUS EXPERIMENTS THAT ARE PROOFS OF THE NEW HYPOTHESES BUT WE MISS THIS PERCEPTION, EXACTLY AS WITH THE STORY OF THE OLD BROWNIAN MOTION AND THE EXISTENCE OF ATOMS. THE BASIC TRIAD POLARITY PARTICLES OF THE FIELDMATER.

The discovery of that matter is not infinite divisible but consists of free and permanent particles (initially called atoms) was a one of the greatest discoveries in the history of the physical science and opened new roads of meaningful understanding of nature and an abundant of technology. A Nobel prize was given for this to A. Einstein for his paper o Brownian motion and photoelectric effect (1905) but this Nobel prize should be given to L. E. Boltzmann for his voluminous work on the statistical atomic theory of the gasses almost 50 years earlier Therefore, any enhancement and multiplication of this principle of atomic structure of matter will similarly bring proportionally great new discoveries and even more meaningful understanding of the material reality. And such an enhancement is the layered atomic structure principle of paragraph 2 , in other words that the material reality exists in discrete orders of scales and discrete layers , each layer created by free and permanent material indivisibles or atoms or particles. The denser the layer the smaller the constituent particles.

Applying this principle to the fieldmatter of paragraph 3 we conclude that the electromagnetic field and the gravitational field consists of three types free and permanent material indivisible or particles of positive, negative and neutral charge.  

We know that this is true for the molecular matter by the protons, electrons, and neutrons that we may denote here respectively by the symbols (p⁺    e^-   n⁰).

Therefore, we can these fieldmatter particles micro-proton, micro-electron and micro-neutron and denoted them by the symbols (μp⁺    μe^-   μn⁰).

We understand as the main phase of the fieldmatter that we observe as classical field to be that of a gas, not of a liquid or solid-state. But this does not mean that we in the universe will not exist also liquid and sold-state forms of the fieldmatter. Furthermore even as gas we may have various forms exactly as with molecular matter, that we have e.g. plasma-state where the triad of  (p⁺    e^-   n⁰) is free and separate, or as e.g. molecular air where they are combined in atoms. Exactly the same occurs with the triad  (μp⁺    μe^-   μn⁰) and gas forms of the fieldmatter.

But which experiments prove the existence of these particles? Let us recall that the existence of the material indivisibles of the molecular matter was considered as proved by the Brownian motion of the dust in liquids which was an experiment known since 1820 and realized that it proves the existence of atoms only by 1905. Similarly, now (2021) we should consider the Shroedinger random motion of an isolated electron (see references [Shroedinger equation 1925]) as the proof of the existence of the material indivisibles constitution of the fieldmatter. And why these particles are not all neutral and are positive, negative and neutral? This is proved by the double spit electron experiment (see references [Double-slit experiment 1927]  ), where an electron as to moves attracts opposite charge particles of the fieldmatter, which pass as waves through both spits and are photographed with interference wave patterns on the photographic surface The electron itself passes by one only of the two slits.

The next table shows the experiments and what they prove.

 

 

 

 

 

Table 1

EXPERIMENT	WHAT IT PROVES
BROWNIAN MOTION (1820)	PROVES THAT MOLECULAR MATTER IS MADE FROM FREE PERMANENT PARTICLES
SHROEDINGER MOTION (1925)	PROVES THAT FIELDMATTER IS MADE FROM FREE PERMANENT PARTICLES
DOUBLE-SLIT ELECTRON EXPERIMENT (1927)	PROVES THAT THE FREE AND PARRMANENT PARTICLES THAT THE FIELDMATTER IS MADE FROM ARE POSITIVE , NEGATIVE AND NEUTRAL

 

Here we state for reasons of completeness the Shroedinger equation for an isolated free electron

(see [Shroedinger equation 1925])

 

 

 

                                                        eq 1

 

The i is the imaginary number unit. The h is the constant of action. The Ψ is the wave function of the Shroedinger. The x, t are the space and time coordinates. The m is the mass of the electron, The V(x.t) is the potential around.

It was not only the Nobel prize winner P. Dirac (see [Dirac P.A.M 1951 ]  ) who writes “we are forced (by experiments) to accept the existence of fieldmatter…” but also the great mathematician John von Neumann who formulated the foundations of quantum mechanics, who wrote in his book (see [Neumann J.v. 2018]  ) that “…if we assume as background of the randomly moving free and isolated electron an absolute material vacuum then we abandon  the principle of sufficient physical causes for physical motions.” Therefore, the fieldmatter exist and we know by now that matter is not infinite divisible.  Other great scientists who believed that matter is not infinite divisible but it consist from material indivisible, or that the same is with the electromagnetic and gravitational field are Philosophers of the Hellenistic ages, Newton, Euler, Laplace, Thompson (Lord Kelvin), FitzGerald, Maxwell, Lorentz, Michelson (and Morley), Sir Ed. Whittaker, F.R.S. Dirac etc.

        There are some physicist that claimed that the random “dancing” of an isolated electron in what

 wrongly thought to be as absolute material quantum vacuum (it is only a vacuum from molecular matter not of    the fieldmatter) is due to the human consciousness. Nevertheless, as such experiments can be conducted away from any human, the truth is that the random motion of the electron is due to the fieldmatter. These physicists believe that the ontology of the physical world and universe is not only matter but also consciousness. On this I would agree, because our knowledge is the knowledge of incarnated spiritual existences that we are, and thus the subjective experiential of consciousness is knowledge that can never be completely reduced to only objective material scientific knowledge. And of course conversely the objective scientific knowledge cannot be reduced completely to a subjective experiential knowledge. The community of mathematicians seems that have accepted this division in the ontology of the universe, and in their mathematics they have the ontology of the infinite which can never be material ontology and we may correspond it to consciousness and the ontology of the finite which we may correspond it to matter, as all matter and its particles is only finite.

We may speculate about the sizes of the fieldmatter particles micro-proton, micro-electron and micro-neutron (μp⁺    μe^-   μn⁰). It does not seem that we have any experimental clue for this. But we may notice some similarities. One guess is that e.g. the micro-electron is so smaller than an ordinary electron as a planet is relative to an ordinary electron. Thus a micro-electron might as well be from 10^(20) to 10^(25)  times smaller in diameter compared to an ordinary electron.

As the applications of the perceptions of L Boltzmann in the laws and phenomena of the molecular matter gasses was a great revelation in physics, so is also the application of his perceptions in the fieldmatter gasses or classical fields like the electromagnetic and the gravitational field.

 

Finally, a few speculations about anti-matter. Physicists accept that there are anti-protons, anti-electrons and anti-neutrons. Thus we might also accept the existence of anti-micro-protons, anti-micro-electrons and anti-micro-neutrons, or in short field-antimatter. Therefore the existence also of anti-photons is natural to realize as waves of the field-antimatter, which is different from the molecular antimatter.

5)   THE SECOND DEEPER MATERIAL REALITY OF FIELDMATTER OF THE CLASSICAL FIELDS. WHAT IS THE FREQUENCY OF A  LAYER OR DESNITY OF MATERIALITY?

For the definition of the frequency of the material layer we will have to find the frequency of their constituent particles. And e.g. here for the molecular matter and for the electron we do not mean the Compton-De Broglie frequency of the electron but we mean the actual average frequency of the spin of the electrons, protons and neutrons. Thus we might be able to calculate the frequency of the molecular matter which is the coarser layer and lower density matter but not yet the frequency of the fieldmatter.

For example of we utilize the data of the classical electron , the frequency fr of the spin of the electron is fr=s*5/(2*m*R^2) where s is the spin s=+,- ½ ĥ , (ĥ=h/2π) , R is the radius, and m its mass. While the Compton-de Broglie frequency fc is fc= (m*c^2)/h.

To make an estimate of the frequency of the visible molecular material reality we enter the data ĥ=h/2π=6.58 *10^(-25) GeV *sec , electron mass me=0.10938356*10^(-31)kgr, and the classical radius of the electron R=re=(1/4πε₀)*(e^2)/me*c^2 , where c is the speed of light. So that   re=2.817940326727*10^(-13) cm, and s=5.264*10^(-44)joules*sec.

Putting these data in the formula of the frequency of the spin and making the calculations it gives the result of about fr=1.81 Terra Hertz.  Of course the data of the classical electron are approximate and average only and so is this frequency of the material reality. The actual frequency might be between 1 Terra Hertz and 1.81 Terra Hertz. As the range of the infrared is between 430 Terra Hz -300 Giga Hz, this frequency is  in the range of the infrared.

An increase of the frequency of the visible molecular material  reality will have the result of decrease of the radius of electrons, protons and neutrons due to the conservation of the angular momentum. . If the increase in the frequency of the elementary particles of an object is sufficient, this may result in to seemingly invisibility of the material objects, and is might be the base of the idea of beam-transportation of objects in the future technology. 

A remark about the frequency of the electron spin calculated here between  1-2  terra Hertz These  frequencies have wavelength which is between about 0.5 mm while the dimension of the nitrogen atom is 56 pm, the mean free path in air is 68 nm , thus there is ultrasound in air with that frequency too!

The next table compares the material layers of the fieldmatter and the molecular matter and perceives them as whole different worlds of materiality with possible liquid, and solid state matter in them.  It may even be that there exist whole planets made only from fieldmatter!

Table 2: Material reality of at least 2 layers-frequencies.

1st frequency material reality or molecular matter (frequency= the average frequency of the spin)	Created by the   free-permanent triad (proton, neutron, electron) (p+ , e-  , n0)	Periodic System: Yes. Known	Common wave: Sound	Common materiality: Solid objects, liquids, gases. planets	Organic living configurations: Yes Known Biology
2nd frequency material reality or fieldmatter (frequency= the average frequency of the spin)	Created by the  free-permanent  triad of fieldmatter particles (μp+,μe- ,μn0)	Periodic System: Yes, Unknown	Common wave: Light	Common materiality: Electromagnetic , Gravitational fields. Unknown if there are also whole planets made from it with gaseous, liquid and solid states of fieldmatter.	Organic living configurations: Yes Unknown e.g. Human fieldmatter body.

 

 

 

 Although physics is one of the oldest and most perfect science, I consider  the social sciences as highly useful, although  imperfect. In addition in social sciences we are faced with too much complicated systems (including the physics and biology of the human beings) that also involve the  free human will. That is why in management and economics, but as far as I know also in informatics, systems are always assumed to be multi-scale in size and time and multi -leveled or multi-layered. The units of the systems have, usually, anested structure. The Bottom-up and Top-down analysis is one of the indispensable tools. In the practice of social sciences,   this idea is  not formulated mathematically, but it is common sense in economic interpretations and analysis. 

It seems  that this concepts of system, is not the one that is used in physics. We describe physical systems always in an almost flat way, and at most with one level ,in other words as  consisting always of one only scale of units, that is related to the size of the particles. We apply very often the same mathematics for large scale cosmological phenomena, that their material units are stars or planets, or to systems consisting from laboratory objects or  even from elementary particles.

And when we have systems that include macro-scale or meso-scale or even also micro-scale bodies, we do not bother to discriminate  the formulation of physical laws at different scales. In other words there is not differentiation due to scalability in the description of  physical systems

Of course, this is not entirely like this. We can recall, for example, that the theory of diffusion in physics and chemistry, admits many distinct “diffusion equations”  for the same substances and  all are true, depending on the time and space scale of the phenomena. On the other hand we should not forget that we do not have mathematics that can discriminate, say, more than two levels of scale. We use, for example, differential manifolds where there are two-scales: The global manifold and the infinitesimal or tangent space, but we do not have “mani-folds” with three or four or more scales! Thus each time we apply the tool of a differential manifold or a differential system we must specify the time and space scale that we interpret as  infinitesimalelements.

Some times we  admire how the ancient Greek thinkers like Democritos  claimed that matter is composed from atoms, so may centuries before  it was possible to prove it experimentally. Maybe it was not that difficult, if they noticed the night sky where the world has definitely a discrete form and induced from it, with sufficient differences, that  also in smaller micro-scales nature would have similar discrete constitution. I would like to point out here that probably what holds is the  more sophisticated principle of “Nested Atomicity Principle” of the world .

In  the light of such a principle, not only planets and stars are composed  from atoms, but also the electrons ,protons and neutrons may be composed from permanent tiny particles.

There is of course the theory of quarks that asserts similar ideas.

 But may be the reality goes beyond the  three quarks for each electron. Maybe the electrons have internally again a nucleus and rotational random motion, from a vast number of small particles of Field-gas. We might call such particles aetherons. They might be as permanent as the protons and smaller in size from an electron as the electron say from the sun. That is by a factor more than 10^-40 or even  10^-70    Thus in a scale smaller than the one investigated by superstring theory. The ordinary density changes of Field-gas might be less that10^-17 than that of the air. Why the smallest permanent particles should be the electron, proton and neutron? Where do we stop? If history may  prove that we have not yet reached the bottom of the physical reality and shall never will, why should we rush to close ourselves with absolute dogmas about the “vacuum”  or space-time, in a coarser world, not leaving open the possibility of a finer material reality?

From this point of view Field-gas can very well be, in the future, the object of a particle theory.

There is a remarkable sequence of almost all the great scientists of the past that claimed the existence ofaether :

Phylosophers of the Hellinistic ages,

 Newton ,

Euler ,

Laplace,

Thompson (Lord Kelvin),

FitzGerald ,

Maxwell ,

Lorenz ,

Michelson (and Morley),

Sir Ed. Whittaker, F.R.S.

Dirac etc .

The very word aether is a Greek word, probably at least from the Hellenistic ages: (αιθέρας) and its etymology comes from the root αιθ- which is an other word for fire (there is the modern Greek word (αιθάλη) which means “smoke” ) and the second part ( -ερας) which is almost like the word (α-ερας), which means air (there is also the English word aero-dynamics which is actually a Greek word ).

There is an old saying that goes like this :It is not necessary to have witness the murderer in order to prove that someone is the murderer.

As A. Einstein took the Nobel prize when he proved the existence of atoms by the almost one century old known experimental fact the Brownian motion that can be derived by the influence of atoms in matter , in the same way the wave mechanics or matrix mechanics formulation of Quantum physics is a way of random behavior of a proton or an electron or a neutron when the move and the proof of the existence of finer free and permanent atoms that make the electromagnetic and gravitational field (the same particles) or aether charged or neutral . This was highlighted by the nobel prize winner Dirac. Also von-Neumann mentioned that the absence of aether (of Dirac) is equivalent to the abandoning of the scientific principle of sufficient physical causes for observable phenomena like the motion of an electron. Instead of Brownian motion we have here the Shrowndiger or De Broglie motion. Of course to be able to derive mathematically that a proton or an electron or a neutron by their spin motion alone create waves in the aether which make them move randomly in the way that matrix mechanics describes or wave mechanics by a probability wave of motion of them is my far more difficult than the 5-6 pages paper of mathematical derivation of Brownian motion of A. Einstein. It requires non-linear random flow and Navier-stokes formulation of the aether, then linearization e.g. to a Dalambertian wave equation due to spin of e.g. an electron. Thus motion , momentum etc of the electron will correspond to an operator in a Hilbert space of aether material waves which is isomorphic with a corresponding Hilbert space of probability waves (Shroendiger waves) of the motion of electron and then back derivation of the Heisenberg matrix formulation of the motion of electron as von-Neumann had proved as equivalent formulation. Such a work though would makes us wake up about the 2nd frequency or 2nd resolution material reality (aether and liquid and solid versions of such matter also, that might make whole planet rather invisible ) which although we do know as electromagnetic waves or gravitational field we have not realized that we are talking about a whole new higher frequency physical reality with a new triad of free and permanent atoms the 1st micro electron , 1st micro-proton and 1st micro-neutron (to discriminate ot from 2nd 3rd aether etc).

For our arguments we accept as sufficient proof for the existence of aether the next, well proven, facts by many experiments for which we consider the aether responsible:

0. That any wave, and so also the light, needs a material medium to travel and is the same  alsowith  the electromagnetic interaction.

0.      That the momentum of the electromagnetic field and of the gravitational field is real, we place in the “vacuum of atoms”, but it is meaningless and contradiction in terms if it is not the momentum of a finer material medium.

1.      That also the gravitational interaction requires a material medium to be propagated .

2.      Field-gas is responsible for the random motion (quantum motion) of electron ,protons and neutrons in the Bohr’s atom. The situation is similar to that the Brownian motion is a proof for the existence of atoms.Only that here we have a Shroendiger motion rather. The previous motion proves that there are permanent particles in the “vacuum” no matter how small,  that make the Field-gas and its random fluctuations. Otherwise we must abandon the “principle of sufficient physical cause”.

3.      The buoancy forces in the  motor of J.Searl,  of Aspden’s,  gyroscope, and DePalma’s gyroscope, cannot come from the “vacuum” as really vacuum, but from a material medium in it. The same with the energy generated by the motor of J.Searl, the Swiss motor of P. Baumann (testatica, at Methernitha), B. DePalma’s generator, Ed. Gray’s “cold-electricity” EMA generator, V. Dimitropoulos magnetic tape portable generators, Tewari’s space energy generator, L. Szabo's EBM generator, and many other more than 10 inventions that exist in the internet. This energy no-doubt comes from the internal energy (mainly heat) of this material medium, or field-gas, that had been called aether.(For relevant  Internet sites see the references)

Here is also a relevant interesting video 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JiYLR0tSp4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yD8grqXhSqY

The claims that are made often in the books that 20th century physics have proved that there is no aether, is a misconception. What could only be proved as impossible, are the  wrong conceptions of aether. Otherwise we are led to inexact and non-viable theories. Reversing the ironic talking of Einstein about the “ghost-field” in microphysical phenomena, we could safely claim that the only “ghost-field”  is Einstein’s “space-time curvature” field . It is a self-contradicting concept where the “empty or vacuum” space-time is also a field with energy and momentum , but still it is only “mathematical” and of no material existence! The very propositions that it is “vacuum” and at the same time it has energy density and momentum density are self-contradicting. A field that has energy and momentum density cannot be of a different ontology than matter, it has to be simply matter of a different time and space scale , a different material layer made in its turn from particles.

We discriminated at the beginning of this page the concept of epistemological layer and the concept of physical material layer. It could be said that the former are the creation of the collective human civilisation trying to understand the natural reality while the former are closer to what we call nature and reality (the only common country as Camus was putting it). To show an example of how the concept of physical material layers  can enhance our perception , let us count them using a human centered approach, and try to conceive usual arguments in cosmology. We should remember the ancient Greek quote "Παντων χρηματων μετρονανθρωπος" which means among other "The measure of any kind of  money is the human being" or "The measure of anything in the human world (but not all of the world) is the human being".

Let us call physical P-Layer 0 (or of we do not want 0 and negative numbers but only positive numbering , P-resolution 3, or P-density 3), the usual matter of the every day life (that is consisting of protons, electrons, neutron, like water, a piece of wood, the ground of the planet etc).

Let us call P-Layer +1, (or P-resolution 2, or P-density 2) the planets of a solar system, star constellations, including galaxies , and clusters of galaxies.

Let us call P-Layer -1 (or P-resolution 4, or P-density 4) the material layer of the classical fields like the electromagnetic field.

We cannot be sure of course that e.g. between layer 0 (or in the positive numbering 3) and layer –1 (or in the positive numbering 4), there is not an intermediate layer, like in the case of layer 0, (in positive numbering 3) and layer +1 (in positive numbering 2), that we are somehow sure. In that case simply the counting is not the densest counting.

We can speculate on the validity of a "locality or contact principle" according to which "Any physical interaction can be derived from that of collisions, if sufficient many physical layers are included"  but would appear as "non-local action at a distance" or "non-mechanical" if less than the necessary physical layers are included in its definition.

Let us stop there at the moment and investigate.

a) How many layers are involve in the attraction of two planets? Layer 0, (or in the positive counting 3) for sure, as planets are made from human layer, matter. Layer 1 (or in the positive counting 2), of course as the planets, as celestial bodies, are the elements of layer1 (or in the positive counting 2),. But as the gravitation propagates through the neutral field-gas, the layer -1 (or in the positive counting 4),  is also involved. Thus 3-layers already are involved in a simple celestial interaction of two planets. . Maybe in the future we shall discover that for a more sensitive description of an interaction it is required the involvement of more layers (e.g. five (5)  layers) but for the present known description it seems that three layers are adequate.

We may of course think of layers -2, (or in the positive counting 5), and layer +2 (or in the positive counting 1) in addition. We refer to layer -2 (or in the positive counting 5), in discussing the "non-mechanical" character of the classical electromagnetism. For the layer +2, (or in the positive counting 1) we could think of a larger "ball" that contains other smaller "balls" each one like the universe or cosmological manifold of the traditional cosmologists. The smaller "balls" that are like the universe of the traditional cosmologists are everywhere that the light of their stars can go. We may think of the cosmological manifold of cosmologists, as a vast “star” or “gaseous planet” of layer +2 (or in the positive counting 1) .  It is most probably a vast star or  a vast gaseous planet. This makes us of course already habitats of the atoms of a gaseous star or planet!  It is gaseous at layer +1 (or in positive counting 2) , as the system of starts, planets, and galaxies, is in gaseous state rather than of anything else. So if we want to look, the atoms, of a gas, with naked eye, there it is: We may just look at the stars in the clear night sky, it is the gaseous layer +1 (or in the positive counting 2)!

The concept of nested material resolution balls is, I think, a cosmological concept closer to truth, about the constitution of reality.

We might assume that the whole of the physical world as conceived from the human mind, has countable infinite many physical layers, but that every conceivable physical entity can consists of finite many only, physical layers. But I am not in favour of using the infinite at all in mathematics , so I would suggest the assumption  that the physical reality consist of finite only physical layers too, but always more than any observable physical system.  In this way any physical system must also have external influences from the rest of the physical layers, so that it can not be entirely isolated, but these influences are also deeper physical layers (and not from "emptiness") so that the principle of sufficient physical causes is not abandoned. We would had to abandon it only if we would consider the particles, and systems of the last, finest physical layer, where physical reality stops (from the point of view of the human being) and probably consciousness starts. In other words, a situation similar to the present situation of quantum mechanics, that sends to exile all the rest of the physical reality and its permanent particles, finer that the permanent particles (electrons, protons, neutrons), under the terms “quantum vacuum” or “curved space time”. In addition, the present approach, keeps classical electromagnetic field , and Einstein’s gravitation field, in the highly contradictory realm of “vacuum” but with energy and momentum  placed at the “vacuum” !

I must admit that in spite the disadvantage of abandoning, the principle of “sufficient physical cause”, there is an advantage in permitting physical systems of the last, finest physical layer, and this is, that everything starts from  particles, and their action at a distance, which is a more robust, magical, hard and powerful concept. This is one advantage that the present quantum mechanics shares. This advantage follows from a similar advantage   in mathematics that would be to reformulate the various areas of mathematics, without the infinite.  The alternative in physics would be to   start considering physical systems from the particles of an intermediate physical reality, without action at a distance, but with a little known, particle structure of the finest layer, and only a statistical mechanics, fluid observable approach of it. For some, this latter approach, that the present civilisation did not made during the20th century, would be  physics of an effortless technology, a lot safer than nuclear power, and of abundant energy too.

 HIGHER DENSITY AND FREQUENCY FIELDMATTER. NON-LOCALITY AND EPR (Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen) PARADOX AS A PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF DEEPER   FREQUENCY 2ND AND FINER FIELDMATTER. THE PARICLES ARE CHORDS OF HIGHER FFREQUENCIES MATERIAL LAYERS. IS IT AN EXPERIMENTAL PROOF THAT THE AXIOM “NOTHIG GOES FASTER THAN LIGHT” IS WRONG?

In the history of physic there were experiments that proved something important but this was not realized but almost one century later. One famous example was the Brownian motion discovered around 1820, which it was realized only in 1905 that proved the existence of atoms. In this paragraph we discuss that the EPR paradox is another such class of experiments. In such cases of the history o physics holds the rule: “We do not believe what we see but we see what we believe”

In 1935 Einstein trying to prove incorrect the formulations of quantum mechanics for the physics of elementary particles, he devised a thought experiment where two particles after some quantum phenomenon in entangled state , where separated to a great distance e.g.one in Tokyo and the other in New York.  Because of a laws of quantum mechanics any measurement in the position or momentum of the one would predict that of the other, which proves an interaction faster than light. And as he was sure that the axiom of  his special relativity that nothing goes fster than light was proved experimentally he concluded that the formation of quantum mechanics is incorrect and incomplete. See in references [EPR paradox] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox.

Nevertheless, we know by now with the current article that the axiom of Einstein that nothing goes faster than light is not really proved from the formulae of special relativity (see paragraph 19) and on the contrary such an interaction faster than the light may occur and is included in the formulation of quantum mechanics know by now as non-locality, and non-local interactions.  This paradox did not remained at the level of thought experiments but was tested and verified experimentally (See [Aspect, Alain 1982], [Hensen, B, et al. (October 2015)], [Giustina, M, et al. (December 2015)], [Rowe MA, et al. (February 2001)], [Shalm, LK, et al. (December 2015).]) Modern interpretations of the non-locality of quantum mechanics  tend to cover-up this discrepancy and claim that non-locality does necessarily violates the axiom that nothing goes faster than light. But the truth is that it does prove the axiom that nothing goes faster than light as wrong and this is the reason that Einstein noticed it. This class of experiments of non-locality prove nevertheless something even more important: Because indeed all interactions are eventually reduced to local interactions which is the base of the physical causality through matter,  ,the explanation of the non-locality is that it exist at least one more finer density (and higher frequency) material layer beyond the field matter of the classical fields which again by a guess of minimalism  and simplicity would consists from a new triad od free and permanent particles of negative positive and neutral polarity that we may call nano-electron , nano-proton and nano-neutron and denoted by (νp⁺    νe^-   νn⁰). Thus so far matter exist in at least 3 layers or densities and created by 3 triads of particles that we have denoted by proton-electron-neutron (p⁺    e^-   n⁰)  micro-electron etc (μp⁺    μe^-   μn⁰) mano-electron etc (νp⁺    νe^-   νn⁰). Then the explanation of the class of non-locality experiments is that the phenomenally non-local interaction are essentially local interactions through “light” waves of the 3^rd layer matter (2^nd fieldmatter) which naturally is expected to travel faster than the light of the 1^st fieldmatter (classical electromagnetic field). This also includes the postulate that the particles are a “chord” of material frequencies and knot of vortex motions in many layers material realities We should remark also that this class of experiments do not exclude the possibility of  a 3^rd higher frequency material reality (pico-electron etc) .